Skip to main content

About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)
the obama administration insisted the assault was a protest that got out of hand. fox news confirmed u.s. intelligence did indeed know it was a terror attack of 24 hours of that evening. bill: yesterday the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and the defense secretary finally statedding the obvious. >> it was a terrorist attack. as we determined details of what took place there and how that attack took place that it became clear there were terrorists who planned that attack. that's when i came to that conclusion. >> day after or was -- >> took a while to really get some of the feedback from what exactly happened at that location. >> there was a thread of intelligence reporting that groups in the environment in western, correction, eastern libya, were seeking to coalesce but there wasn't anything specific. bill: well, peter doocy is live in washington drilling down on the specifics. peter, if the administration knew it was terrorist attack in 24 hours, why did they not just say that? >> reporter: we heard from administration officials there is ongoing investigation and more details wi
for the obama administration in the budget office. >> bill: former presidential candidate and speaker of the house, newt gingrich announc jo. >> greta: the headlines, "obama comes to new york for barbara walters, and sort of u.n." why isn't he meeting with anybody? >> i think it's a comment on the depth of his arrogance. i think this is a person that doesn't care what the world thinks, doesn't care what the american people thinks. if he gets re-elected, he'll be right and the rest of us will be wrong. i mean, his view is all about a cynical, calculated approach. "the view" gets him more votes than meeting with 10 or 15 world leaders. and the fact that he's not doing his job is irrelevant. you have to divide it into two parts. there's winning the office and there is actually being president. he's clearly said if i can win the office, i don't care what the rest of you think. let me say, what should really deeply bother americans is how does all this play out in the rest of the world? imagine you were an ambassador trying to explain to the president of egypt or the president of china or
, then. for 10 days after the banghazi attack, the obama administration denied it was a terrorist attack. >> bill: that's a different issue. >> after carney said that morning, okay, now everybody concedes it's a terrorist attack, the same afternoon obama went back to the, oh, it's really caused by the film. i think it's because he wasn't coordinating. >> bill: he was talking about the film today, which is sort of interesting, talking about the video before the u.n. in his speech, talking about how we don't insult -- we should not tolerate insulting religions, yet there was no mention of the fact that ahmadinejad is going to be speaking tomorrow on the holiest day of the jewish faith, yom kippur. he spoke about the insult to the muslim world with this video, but neglected to talk about the insult to jews, while he's diss the prime minister of israel. >> it's worse than that. obama spent three photographs on a -- three paragraphs on the nut cake film that nobody has seen. why is obama fixated on appeasing muslims while attacking catholics? why is that not a topic that ought to be on every
of preemptive strike against iran, imagine that happens, what does the obama administration do if it's still in power come november and the election? what do you do? >> well, i mean, that's the dilemma in terms of turning to military action that may well be necessary at some point. israel probably has -- certainly has the capability to in some ways delay, you know, the advance towards that nuclear line, but perhaps does not have the ability to destroy the entire program. and that's the conundrum when you get to military action is in many respects, if you start this fight, one of two things has to happen. you have to continue to regime change as we did in iraq. that's a legitimate policy option but obviously a very expensive one. but the other is should it not destroy iran's nuclear program, you probably make that iranian bomb inevitable, because you can destroy facilities but you can't destroy knowledge. >> richard williamson, let's assume mitt romney wins in november. his rhetoric has been even stronger against president ahmadinejad and iran. what would a romney administration do if israel
of the obama administration. if i understand it correctly, i was busy dodging other kinds of projectiles in iraq at the time. if i understand this correctly, this is a deeply idealistic effort to try to say, we are not only going to give money, not only have an impact with a fairly large, civilian assistance program to balance our ongoing military commitment to pakistan, but we are also going to set up a structure or relationship to what is generally called the strategic partnership to try to mbreak out of that pattern. after 2008 and 2009, those of you who knew richard knew the hurricane hit pakistan and there was a set of very ambitious goals that were put in to try to build a long-term commitment to pakistan. i use long-term advisedly. america is focused on the counter-terrorism after post- 9/11. by the almost a pistol logical elements -- epistemological element, this was to balance that short-term set of needs. american safety, the safety of the pack as any people. to balance that with a commitment of long-term stability, and a vision with pakistan of a long-term stability in pakista
of relief. not just in the obama administration but many who said, look, the deadline is next spring, next summer. there isn't going to be a possible israeli military strike before the election. but iran is doubling down. just today prime minister ahmadinejad back in tehran gave a press conference. and he said this, brooke, i'll quote him "we are not people to retreat on the nuclear issue. if somebody thinks they can pressure iran, they are certainly wrong and must correct their behavior." at least in terms of words, which actions are more important than words, but in terms of words not backing down at all. from is going to be the crucial question for the next president whether it's barack obama or mitt romney. >> absolutely. erin burnett, thank you very much. >> good to see you, brooke. >> good to see you. see you tonight
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11 (some duplicates have been removed)